[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrm] We need to reschedule WS-RM conference call
Tom Rutt wrote: Perhaps if enough people can attend we can get some work done with a "not counting towards voting " meeting. We schedule our meetings way in advance. One alternative, if not enought people can attend, would be skip this 15 th meeting but have meetings on the 22nd and 29 th . (i.e postponed the 15th meeting by one week, keeping the scheduled meting for the 29th as is. Again, let me know if you can or cannot attend the WSRM meeting on the 15th.. Also let me know if you could attend on the 22nd, as an alternate to the 15th meeting. Tom Rutt WSRM chair > > I would prefer to go ahead with the call, and give a special "excused" > absence > to people who go on an inteligence gathering mission in Redmond during > our conference meeting. > > Perhaps you could arrange for a small room with call in for those who > are together > in Redmond. > > Anyway, who will be able to attend the Tuesday Teleconference? > > I am able to attend and run the meeting. > > Please respond either if you know you will or know you will not > atttend on tuesday. > > Changing dates is not a good Idea. There are too many people with > schedule calls at various > times. > > Tom Rutt > WSRM Chair > > PS, If there were some comments from that group to be discussed on > changes to our > WS-Reliability requirements and spec to avoid "collisions" with their > architecture, we could > vote to let the experts at that meeting to Join our call for > discussion purposes. > > Alan wrote: > >> Tom >> >> In the interests of harmony and peace, I suggest postponing the call. >> How about later the same week? >> >> alan >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> >> Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:34:48 -0400 >> To: Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM> >> Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop >> Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate] >> >> >>> I just realized, that Tuesday July 15 is the date for our WSRM >>> conference call >>> from 2:30 to 4:30 Pacific time. >>> >>> Tom Rutt >>> \ >>> Doug Bunting wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Colleen, >>>> >>>> If specifications are separated appropriately, separate and >>>> independent development should be straight-forward. Are you saying >>>> Microsoft has done a poor job architecting GXA? Composability of >>>> the results and broad involvement in specification development >>>> should not be contradictory aims. Besides all that, one of the >>>> main enemies of interoperability is competitive specifications. >>>> >>>> Sun strongly agrees with the points Magdolna and Alan have already >>>> raised. If WS-ReliableMessaging, unlike at least BPEL4WS and >>>> WS-Security, cannot be brought forward without the rest of the >>>> architecture you are developing, fine. Please submit the whole >>>> ball of wax to this or another standards venue. We believe >>>> specifications need to be publicly and openly discussed and >>>> improved before they are designated as standards. >>>> >>>> thanx, >>>> doug >>>> >>>> On 07-Jul-03 07:22, Tom Rutt wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I forward this from Colleen Evans, from Microsoft. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Subject: >>>>> FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- >>>>> Please Forward as Appropriate >>>>> From: >>>>> "Colleen Evans" <coevans@microsoft.com> >>>>> Date: >>>>> Sun, 6 Jul 2003 21:18:30 -0700 >>>>> To: >>>>> "Tom Rutt" <tom@coastin.com>, "Doug Bunting" <doug.bunting@Sun.com> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Tom and Doug, >>>>> >>>>> I received a reject from the TC list (only contributing members >>>>> may post). As I believe Magdolna and Alan are both out of the >>>>> office, could one of you please forward this to the list? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Colleen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* Colleen Evans >>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, July 06, 2003 10:08 PM >>>>> *To:* 'Alan Weissberger'; magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com >>>>> *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera >>>>> *Subject:* RE: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop >>>>> Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Magdolna and Alan, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We are soliciting technical input that relates to improving >>>>> technical aspects such as the performance, simplicity, robustness >>>>> and composability of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification. >>>>> >>>>> A core requirement that drives the WS-ReliableMessaging >>>>> specification is maintaining architectural cohesion within the >>>>> specification and in relation to other web services specifications >>>>> (WS-Security, Policy, and so on) and composability with other >>>>> specifications that describe assurances (e.g. WS-Transactions). >>>>> It is therefore very hard to proceed on final design of any one >>>>> particular specification without commensurate progress on the >>>>> others. Separating this specification?s process from the other >>>>> Web Services specifications it composes with would harm the goals >>>>> of composability and architectural coherence. A litmus test for >>>>> the web services architecture is /bone fide/ interoperability and >>>>> composability demonstrated between various implementations from >>>>> several vendors. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The authors have organized this workshop to solicit public input >>>>> and discussion on these specifications while they are early in >>>>> their development. We believe that specifications need to >>>>> demonstrate their value before it is appropriate to consider >>>>> designating them a standard. Successful workshops with community >>>>> input facilitate reaching the interoperability and composability >>>>> target needed to assure that these specifications meet their >>>>> goals. As the specification matures and this extent of >>>>> interoperability has been demonstrated, the authors will decide on >>>>> the appropriate relation to standards organizations and/or any >>>>> other specification efforts. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Colleen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* Alan Weissberger [mailto:ajwdct@technologist.com] >>>>> *Sent:* Friday, July 04, 2003 9:27 AM >>>>> *To:* magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com; Colleen Evans >>>>> *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop >>>>> Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Colleen >>>>> >>>>> What standards body are you planning to take your revised spec >>>>> to? As far as I know, OASIS is the only appropriate standards >>>>> body for this work. >>>>> >>>>> As I mentioned to you today, not only is the WS-RM TC open, but we >>>>> ARE NOT about to rubber stamp the spec that was brought in to >>>>> initiate the TC. >>>>> The WS-RM TC members have spent all our time and efforts on >>>>> establishing functional requirements. These will be incorporate >>>>> into the spec (with additions and deletions), as agreed. For >>>>> example, on last week's telecon we got rid of Message ID, as it >>>>> was considered to be redundant with Group ID/Sequence number as a >>>>> unique identifier. >>>>> >>>>> At GGF8 in Seattle, I talked to Felipe Cabrera of Microsoft about >>>>> participating in the WS-RM TC. He was not very receptive and told >>>>> me to read your spec, as it was clearly superior. >>>>> >>>>> My opinion is that competing specs are harmful to the industry. >>>>> It would be great if the two WS RM'g specs could be consolidated/ >>>>> merged to incorporate the best features of both. This could take >>>>> place in the WS-RM TC if Microsoft and the other authors decided >>>>> to participate. >>>>> >>>>> I will attend your workshop on July 15, but will not offer any >>>>> opinions or suggestions on how Microsoft and other authors should >>>>> progress the work on Reliable Messaging.. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sincerely >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> alan >>>>> >>>>> Alan Weissberger >>>>> >>>>> Technical Consultant- NEC >>>>> 2013 Acacia Ct >>>>> >>>>> Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482 >>>>> >>>>> 1 408 863 6042 voice >>>>> >>>>> 1 408 863 6099 fax >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: >>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:13:22 +0200 >>>>> To: >>>>> Subject: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation >>>>> -- Please Forward as Appropriate >>>>> >>>>> Hi Colleen, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm a bit surprised. And have a question based on the quote from >>>>> the document you sent: >>>>> >>>>> " >>>>> >>>>> The authors of the Specification intend to submit a revised >>>>> version of the Specification to a standards body with a commitment >>>>> to grant a royalty-free license to their necessary patents. We >>>>> need assurance that your feedback and discussions are consistent >>>>> with that goal. >>>>> >>>>> " >>>>> >>>>> Why don't they join to the OASIS WS-RM TC to work on ONE >>>>> WS-Reliability standard instead of going to standardize another >>>>> one ? The OASIS WS-RM TC is open. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> br, >>>>> >>>>> Magdolna >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> *From:* ext Colleen Evans [mailto:coevans@microsoft.com] >>>>> *Sent:* July 03,2003 3:46 >>>>> *Subject:* WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please >>>>> Forward as Appropriate >>>>> >>>>> The authors of the recently-published WS-ReliableMessaging >>>>> specification are hosting a 1-day meeting on July 15, 2003, 9am to >>>>> 5pm, to discuss this specification. This meeting will be held in >>>>> Building 21, Columbia conference room on the Microsoft campus in >>>>> Redmond, WA. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This is an ad-hoc, open forum for 1) *SPECIFICATION AUTHORS* to >>>>> share background information on the design of the specifications >>>>> and to receive feedback and 2) *SOFTWARE VENDORS* to discuss their >>>>> ideas about the practicality of implementing these and related Web >>>>> Services specifications. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We'd like this to be an open meeting and collect a broad range of >>>>> ideas. If you are interested in participating in the discussions, >>>>> please reply to this mail by *EOD 11 July 2003*. Feel free to >>>>> pass this invitation along to other potential participants, either >>>>> in your company or elsewhere. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Note that in order to attend, the attached legal agreement MUST be >>>>> signed by each attendee. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank you and we look forward to seeing you soon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Colleen Evans >>>>> >>>>> XML Web Services Standards >>>>> Microsoft Corporation >>>>> 303 791-3090 or 425 703-9066 >>>>> Mobile: 720 480-3919 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >>>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>> Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com >>> Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> Alan Weissberger >> 2013 Acacia Ct >> Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482 >> 1 408 863 6042 voice >> 1 408 863 6099 fax >> >> >> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >> >> >> >> > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]